Target Selection by Frontal Cortex During Coordinated Saccadic and Smooth Pursuit Eye Movement

Oculomotor tracking of moving objects is an important component of visually based cognition and planning. Such tracking is achieved by a combination of saccades and smooth pursuit eye movements. In particular, the saccadic and smooth pursuit systems interact to often choose the same target, and to maximize its visibility through time. How do multiple brain regions interact, including frontal cortical areas, to decide the choice of a target among several competing moving stimuli? How is target selection information that is created by a bias (e.g., electrical stimulation) transferred from one movement system to another? These saccade-pursuit interactions are clarified by a new computational neural model, which describes interactions among motion processing areas MT, MST, FPA, DLPN; saccade specification, selection, and planning areas LIP, FEF, SNr, SC; the saccadic generator in the brain stem; and the cerebellum. Model simulations explain a broad range of neuroanatomical and neurophysiological data. These results are in contrast with the simplest parallel model with no interactions between saccades and pursuit than common-target selection and recruitment of shared motoneurons. Actual tracking episodes in primates reveal multiple systematic deviations from predictions of the simplest parallel model, which are explained by the current model.National Science Foundation (SBE-0354378); Office of Naval Research (N00014-01-1-0624

Neural Dynamics of Saccadic and Smooth Pursuit Eye Movement Coordination during Visual Tracking of Unpredictably Moving Targets

How does the brain use eye movements to track objects that move in unpredictable directions and speeds? Saccadic eye movements rapidly foveate peripheral visual or auditory targets and smooth pursuit eye movements keep the fovea pointed toward an attended moving target. Analyses of tracking data in monkeys and humans reveal systematic deviations from predictions of the simplest model of saccade-pursuit interactions, which would use no interactions other than common target selection and recruitment of shared motoneurons. Instead, saccadic and smooth pursuit movements cooperate to cancel errors of gaze position and velocity, and thus to maximize target visibility through time. How are these two systems coordinated to promote visual localization and identification of moving targets? How are saccades calibrated to correctly foveate a target despite its continued motion during the saccade? A neural model proposes answers to such questions. The modeled interactions encompass motion processing areas MT, MST, FPA, DLPN and NRTP; saccade planning and execution areas FEF and SC; the saccadic generator in the brain stem; and the cerebellum. Simulations illustrate the model’s ability to functionally explain and quantitatively simulate anatomical, neurophysiological and behavioral data about SAC-SPEM tracking.National Science Foundation (SBE-0354378); Office of Naval Research (N00014-01-1-0624

Neural Dynamics of Saccadic and Smooth Pursuit Eye Movement Coordination during Visual Tracking of Unpredictably Moving Targets

How does the brain use eye movements to track objects that move in unpredictable directions and speeds? Saccadic eye movements rapidly foveate peripheral visual or auditory targets and smooth pursuit eye movements keep the fovea pointed toward an attended moving target. Analyses of tracking data in monkeys and humans reveal systematic deviations from predictions of the simplest model of saccade-pursuit interactions, which would use no interactions other than common target selection and recruitment of shared motoneurons. Instead, saccadic and smooth pursuit movements cooperate to cancel errors of gaze position and velocity, and thus to maximize target visibility through time. How are these two systems coordinated to promote visual localization and identification of moving targets? How are saccades calibrated to correctly foveate a target despite its continued motion during the saccade? A neural model proposes answers to such questions. The modeled interactions encompass motion processing areas MT, MST, FPA, DLPN and NRTP; saccade planning and execution areas FEF and SC; the saccadic generator in the brain stem; and the cerebellum. Simulations illustrate the model’s ability to functionally explain and quantitatively simulate anatomical, neurophysiological and behavioral data about SAC-SPEM tracking.National Science Foundation (SBE-0354378); Office of Naval Research (N00014-01-1-0624

The benefit of symbols: monkeys show linear, human-like, accuracy when using symbols to represent scalar value

When humans and animals estimate numbers of items, their error rate is proportional to the number. To date, however, only humans show the capacity to represent large numbers symbolically, which endows them with increased precision, especially for large numbers, and with tools for manipulating numbers. This ability depends critically on our capacity to acquire and represent explicit symbols. Here we show that when rhesus monkeys are trained to use an explicit symbol system, they too show more precise, and linear, scaling than they do using a one-to-one corresponding numerosity representation. We also found that when taught two different types of representations for reward amount, the monkeys systematically undervalued the less precise representation. The results indicate that monkeys, like humans, can learn alternative mechanisms for representing a single value scale and that performance variability and relative value depend on the distinguishability of each representation

Novel domain formation reveals proto-architecture in inferotemporal cortex

Primate inferotemporal cortex is subdivided into domains for biologically important categories, like faces, bodies, and scenes, as well as domains for culturally entrained categories, like text or buildings. These domains are in stereotyped locations in most humans and monkeys. To ask what determines the location of such domains, we intensively trained 7 juvenile monkeys to recognize 3 distinct sets of shapes. After training, the monkeys developed regions that were selectively responsive to each trained set. The location of each specialization was similar across monkeys, despite differences in training order. This indicates that the location of training effects does not depend on function or expertise, but rather some kind of proto-organization. We explore the possibility that this proto-organization is retinotopic or shape-based

Development of the macaque face-patch system

Face recognition is highly proficient in humans and other social primates; it emerges in infancy, but the development of the neural mechanisms supporting this behaviour is largely unknown. We use blood-volume functional MRI to monitor longitudinally the responsiveness to faces, scrambled faces, and objects in macaque inferotemporal cortex (IT) from 1 month to 2 years of age. During this time selective responsiveness to monkey faces emerges. Some functional organization is present at 1 month; face-selective patches emerge over the first year of development, and are remarkably stable once they emerge. Face selectivity is refined by a decreasing responsiveness to non-face stimuli